A magistrate judge in Kansas denied the defendant’s request to conduct discovery of putative class members via a voluntary questionnaire.
Plaintiff Hapka filed a class action against home health care provider CareCentrix stemming from a 2016 data breach of employees’ personal information, including wage and tax statements. Plaintiff alleged a fraudulent tax return was filed in her name following the cyberattack and that she continued to be at a heightened risk for tax ... Keep Reading »

The District Court of Idaho recently decertified a title insurance reissue rate class action, finding the initial justifications for class certification have “not withstood the test of time.” Under the Idaho Rate Manual, customers are entitled to a 50 percent discount when a title policy is issued within two years of a previous policy on the same property by the same owner. Seven years ago, the court granted class certification for a class of Idaho residential customers ... Keep Reading »

Using the familiar “reasonable consumer standard” that applies in many jurisdictions regarding allegedly deceptive sales practices, a judge of the Northern District of California recently certified a class action of California consumers who purchased Charmin/Proctor & Gamble’s “Freshmates” brand of “flushable” bathroom wet-wipes between April 6, 2011, and August 3, 2017.
The class claims centered on the allegation that Freshmates were not “flushable” as advertised ... Keep Reading »

Last year at this time, we posted about two recent orders from a federal judge in Arkansas that found Rule 11 violations and abuses of the judicial process by attorneys for both the plaintiffs and the defense. Specifically, the district court found that counsel for both plaintiffs and defendants violated Rule 11 when they stipulated to dismissal of a yet-uncertified class action “for the improper purpose of seeking a more favorable forum and avoiding an adverse ... Keep Reading »

As the number of data breaches continues to increase, so too do the costs. After a breach occurs, companies typically expend significant sums conducting investigations, notifying customers and regulators, and engaging in public relations. They incur additional expenses enhancing security and providing identity protection services to victims. And then, of course, there are legal fees, involving both litigation and compliance, which can add up to more than half the total ... Keep Reading »

We have blogged about the evolution and application of the American Pipe tolling rule, as further expanded by Crown Cork, many times (here, here, here, and here), most recently following the Ninth Circuit’s Resh decision last month (here and here). Under American Pipe, individual claims of unnamed class members in a previously dismissed action may proceed as a subsequently filed class action after the limitations period would otherwise have expired.
Today, we switch ... Keep Reading »

A group of plaintiffs hoped to hit the reset button on the Ninth Circuit’s denial of their Rule 23(f) petition to appeal from an order striking class allegations in their case against Microsoft, the maker of the popular Xbox line of videogame consoles. Plaintiffs, who alleged their Xbox 360 consoles had a tendency to scratch game discs, attempted this reset by appealing the certification order after taking a voluntary dismissal of their putative class action with ... Keep Reading »

The Central District of California district court recently weighed in on the limits of mass action jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). The matter began as various individual state court actions alleging that a cholesterol medication caused women taking the drug to suffer from Type II diabetes; after the state court granted a request for “coordination” of the cases, defendant pharmaceutical company removed the cases to federal court based on CAFA’s ... Keep Reading »

Using the Third Circuit’s comparatively robust ascertainability standard, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania recently denied certification of a class of tenants allegedly charged an improper lease-termination fee and subjected to collections calls in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq.
In its order, the district court explained that under the Third Circuit’s ascertainability precedent, ... Keep Reading »

In 2015, Target settled a class action stemming from a massive data breach of its customers’ sensitive information. According to the settlement terms, Target agreed to pay $10 million to those affected. The Minnesota district court originally granted approval over the class and the settlement. However a lone objector filed an appeal, and the Eighth Circuit granted a limited remand because it was not satisfied the district court had conducted a “rigorous analysis” of the ... Keep Reading »

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions.